man on the moon here we go

[proflight2000]

Right, forgive me on this one but the lad is doing ethics and critical thinking at college, yet again the subject of the day is did man really go to the moon. I have my own opinion that they did, the lad actually thinks they did, however, his teacher said they are to think on the issue of how did the flaf move on its own, it moved when handled but the issue is on its own. So if anyone has any replies ill pass them over.

Thanks

Terry

[Akyra]

I noticed while watching S@N 50th bash it showed the moon landing footage.

- There were no stars to be seen in the background

- When one astronaught handing a metal object to another, it just looked like he tossed it to him, it didnt float upwards as you would expect in zero gravity.

- Reflections / shadows / lighting

- Who took the video footage of the lander ejecting (or was it launching) the pod back into space.

- All the debris from the explosive release charges went out and down (gravity?) and didnt float around.

I would like to believe we landed on the moon though, and that all the conspiracies are simply theories. I'm gonna rant on a little bit longer, I wonder why they havent been back to the moon since '69? Is it that they dont see any potential in using the moon for anything, or is it that they know that we wont see what the Apollo mission 'left behind'.... Just my 2cents.

[GazOC]

Check out this great site...

http://www.badastronomy.com/

[geoff_k]

As Gaz says, check out Phil Pleat's site. It goes a long way to lay this scurrilous nonsense to rest.

I remember seeing one of the many hoax websites (can't remember which) that banged on about the usual half-baked conspiracy theories and then offered a link to another site that suggested Armstrong and Aldrin had been warned off by an alien presence on the Moon, but NASA had suppressed it. Just another example of conspiracy theorists coming up with any old garbage irrespective of whether it is contradictory or not.

No matter what proof is offered, the hoax believers will never be convinced otherwise anyway, so let them stew.

It was a remarkable achievement, we are going back (and further I hope)

I should say, by the way, that I'm sure that I saw Elvis shopping in my local Tesco the other day

Geoff

[Macavity]

I recall there was a really GOOD program that addressed these many criticisms. Some observations AND their explanations were [genuinely] instructive! Why were the shadows not "parallel". Why were there "mid-tones" &c. As one who once (inadvertantly!) got caught up in the "Buzz Aldrin was / is my mate, and I will fight anyone in the Bar" etc. I am wary. Personally, I hardly needed to be convinced(!), but that conviction was reinforced, by these rather rational arguments.

Non-parallel: Simply, the "ground" slopes? Mid-Tones: Lunar surface reflects Light etc. More significantly, we can reflect Lasers off their various corner reflectors (Conspiracy-theorists'll always query THAT one?) Bloomin' teachers [teasing]

[Jamie]

- There were no stars to be seen in the background

Can YOU see stars in daylight? (its always daylight on the side of the moon we see)

- When one astronaught handing a metal object to another, it just looked like he tossed it to him, it didnt float upwards as you would expect in zero gravity.

- All the debris from the explosive release charges went out and down (gravity?) and didnt float around.

The moon DOES have gravity (not as much as Earth but it does have it)

- Who took the video footage of the lander ejecting (or was it launching) the pod back into space.

There is a better than average chance that they had a camera on a tripod pointing at the lunar pod AND recording at the time of lift off.

As for the shadows.

How many shooters were there on the grassy knoll/book depository????

I rest my case....

[Akyra]

Thanks for clearing those up Jamie! Wish I was around in '69 to have seen it live on tele. Wait a minute! That would make me 38!! Hell no!!!

[barkis]

I may be mistaken, but I think the camera that recorded the lift off then tracked the pod for a little while, was controlled from earth.

The very short radio signal time lag would make it viable.

I got totally fed up with all the cranks who were hell bent on besmirching these remarkable feats. Every flaw the came up with was more than adequately dealt with. All the genius of Hollywood could not have faked any of those achievements.

Ron.

[proflight2000]

I had the same debate with my boy, I think the moon landings involved some 50,000 people in one form or another, what are the possabilities of all of them staying quiet. Also science now would have a better view of attack, but I have never heard an credible scientist dismiss these events. The other I recall was patrick moore was a witness to the live events, as he was and is maybe the greatest person with knowledge of the moons structures, im sure he would have seen something amiss.

As I recall, I thought a few more missions went to the moon, not just one.

[Astroman]

Six missions landed on the Moon, 8 orbited and returned, 12 men walked on the surface. The video of the lunar landers taking off was controlled from Earth and used a camera aboard the lunar rovers.

www.badastronomy.com

That's all I'm saying.

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

I suppose the "ethics" bit would consider if it would be OK to fake it, given the space race at the time, to cheer up the population of the USA. Fair question I suppose, given the context.

Critical thinking, I'm guessing is thinking in a way that would criticise, rather than assuming that "thinking" is critical (as in crucial) to the argument. If that is the case, then mere "thinking" wouldn't do more than come up with a considered guess, you'd have to do some "Googling", in the modern vernacular, before making a decision.

I wonder why they go for the easy options with these things, why not go the whole hog and ask some big questions like "why are we here?" or even "are we here?". What role does a dog play in your life as a dyslexic and suchlike would be more interesting I think.

The philosophical stuff I've always had a problem with, because I don't think that you can teach it in a way that doesn't infect the student with the point of view of the teacher.

I'd like my kids to be taught to think about all kinds of stuff, but not conspiracy theory stuff. The research will be messy, for obvious reasons, when they do their homework.

To answer the question, surely you'd have to ask somebody who actually went there, and then try to work out if they were lying?

My opinion? I watched the guy do it on the telly, so it actually really did happen.

To prove it is a different matter entirely, in the classroom, as they can't call witnesses and suchlike. I expect that there's more web pages showing how it didn't happen than there are bona fide pages detailing what really happened, so its going to end in tears I expect.

Captain Chaos

[stargazer1980]

believe it or not the moon does have gravity but only a third of that compared to eatrh! You only reach zero gravity at approximately 30ft! Reason for this being is, that, there is not enough gravity to bring you bck down again... funny that! the moon landing was fake! Look at all the footage and try and persuade me its real..............................no chance! The only thing that represents anything landing on a moon, is the toilet paper that wipes my a$$ every time i drop one lol

Sorry but NO

Sorry cant be much more help than that

Darren

[Cloudwatcher]

What Stargazer 1980 say is right. Well, the bit about 'not being much help' is.

I agree with the Captain, it were on telly so it must be true!

End of story???

[peonic]

Well the only way that the US can categorically prove that they conducted the moonlandings is to send a lay-person to verify it. Yes, it's a tough job, but I suppose I could squeeze a trip in, if they want to send a car to collect me......

[Cloudwatcher]

Well the only way that the US can categorically prove that they conducted the moonlandings is to send a lay-person to verify it. Yes, it's a tough job, but I suppose I could squeeze a trip in, if they want to send a car to collect me......

To the moon by car! How very brave of you!

[magician]

what would be the point (Of faking)? some body would go back at some time, ask the doubting Thomas's if all the other flights, space walks, etc., were faked too, better still don't get involved, just shake your head, Tut a little, and Smile !

Cheers Frank

[iantobach]

A couple of points-

1. Slight gravity on the moon- so things will not float.

2.We can reflect lasers off the laser reflections left on the moon.

3.The reason there is no stars on the pictures taken is that the cameras were set for "daylight"(moon light??) exposures- hence not long enough exposures for the stars to show.

4.The flag waving , being another argument- if you ever see the actual full footage you will see it moving for a short while- due to momentum- partly due to the bit of metal holding it straight- then it loses thet momentum and holds still.

5. 400,000 people worked on the apollo mission- surely more than one or two publicity seekers might have said something by now.

I could go on and on- but an elederly chap I know who recently died- was one of the few Brits who worked on the apollo mission- people stating this remarkable achievement was faked are unable to face up to probably what was the most remarkable achievement of the 20th century. At the time the odds were low- as low as one in six - but they did it( but note apollo 13 didn`t - 3 men died on apollo 1 ).

skeptics need to move on( how about WMD`s in iraq for one!!)

[Ant]

I noticed while watching S@N 50th bash it showed the moon landing footage.

- There were no stars to be seen in the background

Thats down to exposure times. You could take an image in my garden at night and you would get a view that looked like daylight and there would be no stars

- When one astronaut handing a metal object to another, it just looked like he tossed it to him, it didn't float upwards as you would expect in zero gravity.

Zero Gravity? Who mentioned zero gravity? The moons gravity can be felt on Earth (tides). The moon is not ZERO G.

- Reflections / shadows / lighting

The issue with the shadows is due to an uneven surface. There are reasons for the reflections and Lighting but I can't remember the exact details.

- Who took the video footage of the lander ejecting (or was it launching) the pod back into space.

I would imagine that there was a camera left on the part of the lander that stayed there. This camera could have continued to supply a feed after everyone left. (This is just a guess)

- All the debris from the explosive release charges went out and down (gravity?) and didn't float around.

See above!

There was talk of a Japanese satellite that was going to map the moon down to a resolution capable of seeing / photographing the lunar landers etc that were left behind.

You may be able to tell that I believe that we went to the moon.

Ant

[John]

As someone who was 9 years old when the 1st man stepped on to the surface of the moon and can recall watching the coverage of all the moon missions (I was nuts about space even then !) I am 100% convinced that what I witnessed was real and, IHMO, remains the single biggest achievement of mankind to date.

I am though dissapointed that the momentum built up during that era seems to have been lost somewhat over the suceeding decades. It is quite difficult explaining to my teenage children why the last landing was over 30 years ago and why nothing quite as momentus has been undertaken since then - although many important strides forward in scientific discovery have take place though, just not as high profile.

Maybe it's the apparent lack of such high profile ventures in recent times and also maybe the lack of the bravery and imagination to instigate them that is leading some to question whether the Apollo landings ever actually took place. I do find myself wondering, in this risk averse, cost justified, market driven world we now live in, whether we could actually make stuff like that happen again

John

[barkis]

Suffice to say, there are still lots of sceptics on this planet, (At least I think they're on this planet.) who still believe the earth is flat.

I would not waste a second trying to convince them otherwise.

Ron.

[Macavity]

I was interested to find out how "easy" these corner reflectors were to hit via a ground-based laser. Looks like the beam spread is about 4km. So we can say that, at the few km level, there must be SOMETHING highly reflective (only) at known predicted locations on the lunar surface.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/features.cfm?feature=605

Still there apparently too...

[GazOC]

The Moon landings we're pushed through ahead of time due to political pressures (no, not from Johns Mum ), at one time America was spending 5% of its budget on NASA. Those pressures don't exist anymore, hence the current levels of space funding and achievements.

[Cloudwatcher]

Yes,polital pressures lacking now. No communist super power to to beat in a 'space race'

and possibly the 'Been There Done That' syndrome still holds sway as far as the Moon is concerned.

[barkis]

I am pretty sad that the moon was used as a political pawn back in the cold war days. Once the Idealogical war was won, the incentive started to die. That surprised me and I am sure a lot more people who are hell of a lot more qualified than me to make hindsight judgements on the usefulness of the moon. I am without doubt, that our natural satellite will provide a lot of scientific benefits, once the habitats, laboratories have been established. A lot of the logistics might well be in place now, if the political and scientific will had persisted.

Perhaps if the war chests had been emptied to aid that endeavour, the world might be a better place today.

If this is deemed to be too risque, then I will understand if it is stopped immediately.

Ron.

[The Warthog]

One thing that is forgotten in the conspiracy theories is that thousands of people were involved in building the rockets, training the astronauts, building the space centres, and actually launching and tracking the things. Thousands of people. And Americans are blabbermouths. You couldn't scare or pay all of these people enough to guarantee that everyone would keep quiet about the conspiracy.

I saw the lander return in real time, and it was always obvious that the picture was taken by a static camera left on the moon for the purpose.

You can't see stars in the picture because the sunlight on the rocks and other surroundings is so bright that the camera lenses shut down to where they could not pick up the much dimmer stars.

The moon is not zero gravity, it has about 1/6 of earth gravity, so you would toss something to a friend, and you wouldn't have the strength to toss anything off the moon so it would never come back. Gravity does not end at 30 feet above the Moon (where did that one come from?). The Moon's gravity causes tides on Earth, 400,000 km away. The point at which the Earth's and Moon's gravities cancel out is about 50,000 km above the Moon.

And I just realized that Ian and Ant covered a lot of this ground already, (I didnt' read the entire thread first) but I've gone to the trouble of writing it, so I'm going to post it.